【本文參加《全球書評(píng)》譯者招募令活動(dòng),活動(dòng)公告:http://article.yeeyan.org/view/293376/378623】
米蘭·昆德拉《小說的藝術(shù)》81卷
Milan Kundera, The Art of Fiction No. 81
文/克里斯蒂安·薩爾蒙
本次采訪是1983年秋訪者與米蘭昆德拉幾次邂逅的結(jié)果。我們?cè)谒菞澘拷麺ontparnasse的閣樓公寓會(huì)面,并在這里開展工作。昆德拉把這個(gè)小房間當(dāng)工作室,架子上擺滿了哲學(xué)和音樂理論書籍,還有一臺(tái)老式打字機(jī)和一張桌子,整體看上去更像學(xué)生的房間而不是世界知名作家的書房。有一面墻上并排掛著兩張照片,一張是他身為油畫家的父親,另一張是他十分敬仰的捷克作曲家萊奧什·雅納切克(Leos Janacek)。
我們用法語探討了幾次,每次都無拘無束,時(shí)間較長(zhǎng)。我們用的不是磁帶錄音機(jī),而是打字機(jī)、剪刀和膠水。在丟棄紙團(tuán)的沙沙聲中,經(jīng)過幾次修訂,這篇文字慢慢呈現(xiàn)在我們眼前。
這次訪談是在昆德拉新書《不能承受的生命之輕》一出版成為暢銷書之后。突然而至的名聲讓他很不自在,馬爾科姆·勞瑞(Malcolm Lowry)曾說過:“成功就像可怕的災(zāi)難,比家中著火還慘,名聲摧毀靈魂的棲所。”對(duì)于這一點(diǎn),昆德拉必定感同身受。我問他怎么看媒體上某些對(duì)他小說的評(píng)論,他說:“對(duì)我個(gè)人的評(píng)論太多了?!?br>
絕大多數(shù)評(píng)論家喜歡研究作家及其個(gè)性、政治主張、私人生活,卻忽視了對(duì)作家作品的研究。昆德拉不希望談?wù)撟约海坪跏菍?duì)此做出的本能反應(yīng)。昆德拉告訴《新觀察家》:“對(duì)必須討論自身的厭惡將小說天才和抒情天才區(qū)分開來?!币虼?,拒絕討論自己可以直接把文學(xué)作品和文學(xué)形式擺在注意力中心,聚焦小說本身。這才是本次討論寫作藝術(shù)的目的。
訪問人
你說過相比其他現(xiàn)代文學(xué)作家,你感覺自己更接近維也納小說家羅伯特·穆齊爾(Robert Musil)和赫爾曼·布洛赫(Hermann Broch)。布洛赫和你一樣認(rèn)為心理小說時(shí)代已經(jīng)終結(jié),但他相信自己所說的“多元?dú)v史”小說活力依舊。
米蘭·昆德拉
穆齊爾和布洛赫賦予小說極大的責(zé)任。他們把小說當(dāng)做思考的集大成,人類能夠整體質(zhì)疑世界的最后陣地00。他們確信小說具有超強(qiáng)的集合力(融合力),可以集詩歌,幻想,哲學(xué),格言和散文于一身。布洛赫在信中對(duì)這個(gè)問題有過深刻的論述,但是在我看來,他的“多元?dú)v史”小說這個(gè)詞選得不恰當(dāng),沒有很好地詮釋其想法。實(shí)際上布洛赫的同胞,奧地利散文大師阿德爾伯特·斯蒂夫特 ( Adalbert Stifter )創(chuàng)造了真正意義上的“多元?dú)v史”小說——1857年出版的《圣馬丁的夏天》。這本小說聲名遠(yuǎn)揚(yáng):尼采將其納入德國(guó)文學(xué)四大名著。但如今這本書沒法讀,里面滿是地質(zhì)學(xué)、動(dòng)植物學(xué)、手工藝、繪畫和建筑等內(nèi)容。這部包羅萬象、令人振奮的百科全書實(shí)際上遺漏了人類自己及其處境,準(zhǔn)確的原因是它的多元?dú)v史?!妒ヱR丁的夏天》完全缺少令其特別的東西,但布洛赫不一樣,而且恰恰相反!他著力發(fā)現(xiàn)小說本身能發(fā)掘的內(nèi)容。布洛赫喜歡稱為“小說知識(shí)”的特定對(duì)象是存在。在我看來,“多元?dú)v史”必須定義為“將每種設(shè)置和每種知識(shí)形式結(jié)合在一起從而揭示存在的方法”。是的,我感覺自己更接近于使用這一種方法。
采訪人
你在《新觀察家》上發(fā)表的一篇長(zhǎng)篇散文引發(fā)法國(guó)人重新發(fā)現(xiàn)布洛赫。你對(duì)他贊譽(yù)很高,同時(shí)又加以批判,文章結(jié)尾寫道:“所有偉大的作品(只因其偉大)在一定程度上都不完整。
昆德拉
布洛赫能夠啟發(fā)我們,不只因?yàn)樗瓿傻臇|西,還有他追求卻獲得不了的東西。他作品的不完整幫助我們懂得對(duì)新藝術(shù)形式的需求:(1)徹底剝離無關(guān)緊要的內(nèi)容(這是為了抓住現(xiàn)代社會(huì)中存在的復(fù)雜性,同時(shí)不失結(jié)構(gòu)的清晰明確);(2)“小說對(duì)位“(把哲學(xué),敘事和夢(mèng)融合進(jìn)一支音樂);(3)專具小說散文(換句話說,不主張傳遞一些明確無疑的啟示,保持猜想性,游戲性和諷刺性)
訪問人
這三點(diǎn)似乎道出了你的整個(gè)藝術(shù)綱領(lǐng)。
昆德拉
為了使小說對(duì)存在進(jìn)行多元?dú)v史闡釋,你需要精通省略技巧和凝練藝術(shù),否則就會(huì)陷入連篇累牘的泥潭。穆齊爾的《沒有個(gè)性的男人》是我最喜歡的兩三部小說之一,但不要讓我贊賞它沒有勾勒出的廣度!想想一眼看不盡的巨大城堡,想想九個(gè)小時(shí)的四重奏,人類是有極限的(人類的比例),不該違背,比如記憶局限??赐暌徊啃≌f,你應(yīng)該還記得開頭,否則這個(gè)小說就失去了形態(tài),“構(gòu)架的明晰性”就變模糊。
訪問人
《笑忘錄》有七部分,你如果寫作不那么簡(jiǎn)練,完全可以寫成七部不同的長(zhǎng)篇小說。
昆德拉
但寫成七篇獨(dú)立小說的話,我就喪失了最重要的東西,不能在一本書里抓住“現(xiàn)代社會(huì)中人類存在的復(fù)雜性“。簡(jiǎn)練的藝術(shù)絕對(duì)是最根本的,要求永遠(yuǎn)直擊事物的中心。在這一點(diǎn)上,我總是想到我推崇備至的捷克作曲家萊奧斯·雅那可切(Leo? Jana?ek)。他是現(xiàn)代音樂領(lǐng)域最偉大的大師。他決心將音樂剝離至最基本的元素,具有革命意義。當(dāng)然,每一首音樂作曲涉及眾多技術(shù):主題呈現(xiàn),發(fā)展,變奏,復(fù)調(diào)(常常是必然出現(xiàn)的),加入配器,過渡等等。今天人們可以使用電腦作曲,其實(shí)電腦一直存在于人的頭腦——如果有必要,作曲家無需構(gòu)想也可以寫出奏鳴曲,只需依照作曲規(guī)律進(jìn)行擴(kuò)展即可。雅那可切的目標(biāo)是摧毀電腦!突進(jìn)排列而不用過渡,不斷重復(fù)而不用變化,總是徑直進(jìn)入事物的中心:唯一透出些許本質(zhì)的音符才有權(quán)存在。小說也很類似:小說里充斥著“技術(shù)”和代替作者工作的規(guī)則——展示一個(gè)人物,描述一個(gè)社交環(huán)境,把行為放入歷史背景中,把無關(guān)緊要的片段塞進(jìn)人物的一生。每次改變場(chǎng)景都要求新的說明、描寫和解釋。我和雅那可切的目標(biāo)相像,為了讓小說擺脫小說技巧和小說語言的梏桎,實(shí)現(xiàn)言簡(jiǎn)意賅。
訪問人
你提到的第二種藝術(shù)形式是“小說對(duì)位法”。
昆德拉
若將小說視為智慧的集大成,“復(fù)調(diào)”幾乎必然要提出來,并且這個(gè)問題還有待解決。拿布洛赫的小說《夢(mèng)游人》來說,它由五種不同類別的部分組成:(1)以主要人物帕斯諾、艾斯克、于格諾為基礎(chǔ)的“小說”敘事;(2)安娜·溫德靈的個(gè)人故事;(3)對(duì)軍醫(yī)院生活的寫實(shí);(4)對(duì)救世軍女孩的敘寫(部分以詩歌的形式呈現(xiàn));(5)討論價(jià)值觀墮落的哲學(xué)散文(使用學(xué)術(shù)語言)。每條線都精彩紛呈,然而盡管它們采用并線處理,不斷交替(即復(fù)調(diào)方式),但是五個(gè)部分聯(lián)系不起來,也就是說它們并沒有形成真正意義上的復(fù)調(diào)。
訪問人
用復(fù)調(diào)作比喻應(yīng)用到文學(xué)上,你是否在要求小說做它不可能做到的事情?
昆德拉
小說可以用兩種方法融合外部元素。堂吉訶德在旅行過程中遇見了各色人等,這些人給他講了自己的故事。如此一來,獨(dú)立的故事就嵌入了小說整體,融入整體框架。這種創(chuàng)作經(jīng)常出現(xiàn)在十八世紀(jì)和十九世紀(jì)的小說里。但是布洛赫沒有把安娜·溫德靈的故事放入艾斯克和于格諾的主線故事,而是同時(shí)展開。在他之前,薩特(Sartre)和多斯帕索斯(Dos Passos)也使用這種多線同時(shí)展開的技巧,但他們的目的是把不同的小說故事放在一起,也就是說對(duì)象為單一元素,并非像布洛赫安排的多樣化元素。
此外,他們對(duì)這種技巧的使用過于機(jī)械,缺乏詩意。我想不出比“復(fù)調(diào)”和“對(duì)位”更好的術(shù)語來形容這種創(chuàng)作,而且這種音樂類比很有用。比如,《夢(mèng)游人》第三部分困擾我的第一件事是五個(gè)元素不盡平等。在音樂對(duì)位法中,所有聲音平等是基本規(guī)則。布洛赫作品的第一元素(對(duì)艾斯克和于格諾的小說描寫)比其它元素占據(jù)更多篇幅。更為重要的是,由于它聯(lián)系著小說前面兩部分內(nèi)容,因此肩負(fù)聯(lián)合的任務(wù),地位特殊。因此它吸引了更多的注意,并有把其它元素變成伴奏的危險(xiǎn)。困擾我的第二件事是,盡管在巴赫的一首賦格曲里,失去其中任何一種聲音都無法實(shí)現(xiàn)應(yīng)有效果,不過安娜·溫德靈的故事或論價(jià)值觀墮落的散文能夠以獨(dú)立作品形式很好地呈現(xiàn)出來,即便單獨(dú)列出,絲毫無損其含義和品質(zhì)。在我看來,小說對(duì)位法的基本要求有:(1)各種元素的平等;(2)整體的不可分割性。記得在完成《笑忘錄》第三部分《天使》的那一天,我對(duì)自己感到無比驕傲。我確定自己發(fā)現(xiàn)了安排敘事新方法的關(guān)鍵,內(nèi)容主要有:(1)有關(guān)兩個(gè)女學(xué)生和她們漂浮00的逸聞;(2)自傳性故事;(3)對(duì)一本女權(quán)主義書籍的批評(píng)散文;(4)關(guān)于天使和魔鬼的寓言;(5)描寫保羅?艾呂雅(Paul Eluard)飛翔在布拉格上空的夢(mèng)境描寫。這些元素不能脫離彼此而存在,互為解說,共同探究一個(gè)簡(jiǎn)單主題,問一個(gè)簡(jiǎn)單問題——“天使是什么?“
第六部分,也稱為《天使》,由以下部分組成:(1)對(duì)達(dá)米娜之死的夢(mèng)境描寫;(2)對(duì)我父親死亡的自傳描寫;(3)對(duì)音樂學(xué)的沉思;(4)對(duì)正在摧毀布拉格的遺忘之風(fēng)的反思。我父親和被孩子們折磨的達(dá)米娜有什么聯(lián)系呢?借用洛特雷阿蒙(Lautreamont)聞名遐邇的想象,它是在某個(gè)主題桌子上“縫紉機(jī)與雨傘的相會(huì)”。小說復(fù)調(diào)更講究詩意而非技巧,我在文學(xué)之外找不到有這樣復(fù)調(diào)詩意的例子,但阿倫·雷乃(Alain Resnais)的新電影讓我倍感吃驚,他對(duì)對(duì)位法藝術(shù)的運(yùn)用令人欽佩。
訪問人
對(duì)位法在《笑忘錄》中體現(xiàn)得并不明顯。
昆德拉
這正是我的用意所在。在這部書中,我想要讓夢(mèng)境、敘事和反思在完全自然、不可分割的流動(dòng)中結(jié)合在一起。但是小說第六部分的復(fù)調(diào)特征十分突出:斯大林兒子的故事,神學(xué)深思,一個(gè)亞洲政治事件,弗朗茨死于曼谷以及托馬斯在波西米亞下葬,都貫穿著同一個(gè)永恒的疑問——“媚俗是什么?”這段復(fù)調(diào)樂章是支撐小說整體結(jié)構(gòu)的支柱,是小說構(gòu)架秘密的關(guān)鍵。
訪問人
你要求寫“專具小說散文”,對(duì)《夢(mèng)游人》中談?wù)搩r(jià)值觀墮落的散文有所保留。
昆德拉
那是一片非常優(yōu)秀的散文!
訪問人
你對(duì)它并入小說的方式存有疑問。布洛赫沒有舍棄他的學(xué)術(shù)語言,而是直截了當(dāng)?shù)乇磉_(dá)自己的觀點(diǎn),沒有隱藏自己的任何特性——這也是曼(Mann)或穆齊爾會(huì)采取的方式。難道這不是布洛赫的真正貢獻(xiàn),他的新挑戰(zhàn)嗎?
昆德拉
這點(diǎn)沒錯(cuò),他充分意識(shí)到自己的勇氣,但同時(shí)也有風(fēng)險(xiǎn):他的散文可以當(dāng)做小說意識(shí)形態(tài)的關(guān)鍵來解讀和理解,充當(dāng)它的“真相”,這或許會(huì)把小說的剩余部分變成單純的思想圖解。但小說各部分的平衡被破壞,散文的真相變得太沉重,小說精妙的結(jié)構(gòu)布局瀕臨崩塌。一篇無意詳述哲學(xué)論題的小說(布洛赫厭惡這類型的小說)最后或許正好讓人用這種方式解讀。應(yīng)該怎樣把一篇散文嵌入小說呢?很重要的是謹(jǐn)記一個(gè)基本事實(shí):沉思一進(jìn)入小說中,其本質(zhì)就發(fā)生改變。在小說之外,一個(gè)人處于申明主張的地界:每個(gè)人都是哲學(xué)家、政治家和看門人,都對(duì)自己說的話確有把握??墒?,小說不是一個(gè)人下斷言的地方,而是情節(jié)和假設(shè)馳騁的地方。小說中的沉思,就其本質(zhì)而言,是假定的。
訪問人
但是小說家為什么想要?jiǎng)儕Z自己在小說中公開肯定地表達(dá)其哲學(xué)的權(quán)利呢?
昆德拉
因?yàn)樗麤]有哲學(xué)!人們經(jīng)常談契訶夫、卡夫卡或者穆齊爾的哲學(xué),卻僅僅是從他們作品中找條理清晰的哲學(xué)!即便他們?cè)诠P記本中表述自己的思想,這些思想也只能算是思考練習(xí),把玩悖論或即興創(chuàng)作,并非申明哲學(xué)。寫小說的哲學(xué)家不過是利用小說的形式來闡述觀點(diǎn)的偽小說家而已,伏爾泰和加繆都沒有發(fā)現(xiàn)“小說獨(dú)立發(fā)掘的內(nèi)容”。我只知道一個(gè)例外,那就是狄德羅的《宿命論者雅克》。這是一個(gè)奇跡!這位哲學(xué)家跨越小說的界限,變身戲謔的思想者。這部小說中沒有一個(gè)嚴(yán)肅的句子,都是在游戲,因而在法國(guó)被低估了。實(shí)際上《宿命論者雅克》包含著法國(guó)已經(jīng)丟失和拒絕重拾的一切。在法國(guó),人們認(rèn)為思想優(yōu)于作品,《宿命論者》不能被翻譯成思想語言,因此不能在思想的國(guó)土得到理解。
訪問人
在《玩笑》中,杰洛斯拉夫發(fā)展出了一套音樂學(xué)理論,其思想的假定特征十分明顯。但是《笑忘錄》中的音樂學(xué)沉思是作者你自己的,那么我怎樣理解它們是假設(shè)還是斷言?
昆德拉
這全靠基調(diào)來決定。從第一段文字開始,我便想賦予這些沉思游戲性、諷刺、挑釁、實(shí)驗(yàn)性或問詢的論調(diào)?!恫荒艹惺艿纳p》第六部分整體上是一篇講媚俗的文章,詳述了一個(gè)主要論點(diǎn):媚俗是對(duì)大糞存在的絕對(duì)否定。這個(gè)對(duì)媚俗的冥思對(duì)我至關(guān)重要,它基于大量思想、經(jīng)驗(yàn)、研究甚至激情之上,但基調(diào)一點(diǎn)也不嚴(yán)肅,而是具有挑逗性。這篇散文是純小說冥思,脫離這部小說就難以想象。
訪問人
你小說的復(fù)調(diào)還包含另一個(gè)元素——夢(mèng)境描述,它是《生活在別處》第二部分的全部?jī)?nèi)容,也是《笑忘錄》第六部分的基礎(chǔ),以特蕾莎夢(mèng)境的形式貫穿《不能承受的生命之輕》。
昆德拉
這些段落也最容易產(chǎn)生誤解,因?yàn)槿藗兿胍獜闹姓页瞿撤N標(biāo)志性的信息。特蕾莎的夢(mèng)沒有什么可破譯的,它們是關(guān)于死亡的詩歌,其含義在于它們的美,這種美也征服了特蕾莎。順便說一下,你意識(shí)到人們不知道如何解讀卡夫卡只是因?yàn)樗麄兿胍谱g他嗎?他們沒有沉浸在卡夫卡無與倫比的想象里,而是尋找象征,并且想出來的都是些陳詞濫調(diào)——生命是荒誕的(或者不荒誕),上帝難以觸及(或可以觸及)等等。如果你不了解想象存于自身的價(jià)值,你就對(duì)藝術(shù),尤其是現(xiàn)代藝術(shù)一無所知。諾瓦利斯(Novalis)明白這一點(diǎn)。他在贊揚(yáng)夢(mèng)境時(shí)說,它們“保護(hù)我們免受生活的單調(diào),讓我們感受它們游戲的喜悅,從嚴(yán)肅中解放。”他第一個(gè)理解夢(mèng)想和夢(mèng)幻般想象在小說中的作用。他計(jì)劃在《奧佛特丁根》(Heinrich von Ofterdingen)第二卷時(shí),讓夢(mèng)想與現(xiàn)實(shí)緊密纏繞,叫人無從分辨。不幸的是,第二卷剩下的全是諾瓦利斯描述其審美意向的注解。一百年后,他的志向由卡夫卡實(shí)現(xiàn)??ǚ蚩ǖ男≌f融合了夢(mèng)想與現(xiàn)實(shí),即它們非夢(mèng)非現(xiàn)實(shí)。最重要的是,卡夫卡帶來了美學(xué)革命,一個(gè)審美奇跡。當(dāng)然,沒有人能復(fù)制他的作為,但我、他以及諾瓦利斯都希望把夢(mèng)和對(duì)夢(mèng)境的想象帶進(jìn)小說。我沒有融合夢(mèng)境和現(xiàn)實(shí),而是采用復(fù)調(diào)對(duì)位法。夢(mèng)境描述是對(duì)位法的元素之一。
訪問人
《笑忘錄》最后一部分沒有采用復(fù)調(diào),這或許是本書最有意思的部分。它由十四章構(gòu)成,描寫一個(gè)男人(揚(yáng))生活中性愛場(chǎng)景。00
昆德拉
我們來說另一個(gè)音樂術(shù)語,這種描寫叫“主題與變奏”。主題是事物一旦跨越便失去本身意義的邊界。我們的生活緊鄰這個(gè)邊界展開,而且我們隨時(shí)會(huì)冒險(xiǎn)穿越這條界線。第十四章是對(duì)處于有意義和無意義邊界上同一情境的性欲情色做出的第十四種變體。
訪問人
你認(rèn)為《笑忘錄》是一部“變奏形式小說”,那么它還是小說嗎?
昆德拉
小說的情節(jié)不一致,讓它看起來不像小說。人們不能想象一篇沒有情節(jié)一致性的小說。甚至新小說派的探索也基于情節(jié)(非情節(jié)00)一致性。斯特恩(Sterne)和狄德羅(Diderot)把一致性搞得極度脆弱來取悅自己。雅克和他的主人在《宿命論者雅克》中篇幅更少,只不過是插入逸聞、故事和思想的滑稽借口而已。然而,這種借口,這種“結(jié)構(gòu)”是讓小說更像小說所必須有的。《笑忘錄》中沒有任何此類借口,而主題一致性和變奏將小說凝聚為整體。它是小說嗎?它是小說,是一部透過虛構(gòu)人物來思考存在的小說。這種形式自由度無限。縱觀歷史,小說從不知道如何發(fā)揮其無盡可能的優(yōu)勢(shì),錯(cuò)失良機(jī)。
訪問人
但除了《笑忘錄》,你的小說也建立在情節(jié)一致性上,盡管《不能承受的生命之輕》多元性松散了許多。
昆德拉
沒錯(cuò),但是其它更重要的一致性代替了它們:相同形而上學(xué)問題的統(tǒng)一,同樣動(dòng)機(jī)和變奏的統(tǒng)一(例如《為了告別的聚會(huì)》中父權(quán)動(dòng)機(jī))??墒?,我想特別強(qiáng)調(diào)的是這部小說根本上講是基于許多基本詞語,好比舍恩伯格(Schoenberg)的音符系列?!缎ν洝返幕驹~語序列如下:遺忘,笑聲,天使,“力脫思特”,邊界。在小說的發(fā)展過程中,這五個(gè)關(guān)鍵詞經(jīng)過分析、研究、定義和再定義,轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)榇嬖诘姆懂?。小說依據(jù)這幾個(gè)類別來敘寫?yīng)q如一座房子依靠大梁來建設(shè)?!恫荒艹惺艿纳p》的大梁為:重,輕,靈魂,身體,大行進(jìn)曲,大糞,媚俗,激情,眩暈,強(qiáng)壯和軟弱。鑒于其范疇特征,這些詞不能被同義詞取代。這一點(diǎn)總是需要向譯者一遍遍地說明,因?yàn)樗麄兿胍w現(xiàn)“好的風(fēng)格”,避免重復(fù)。
訪問人
談到明晰的組織結(jié)構(gòu),我很驚訝除了一部作品外,你的全部小說都分成了七部分
昆德拉
我寫完第一部小說《玩笑》后,沒有驚訝它有七部分。隨后我寫了《生活在別處》,這部小說差不多完成了,有六個(gè)部分。我感覺不滿意,突然間有了個(gè)主意,插入一個(gè)發(fā)生在英雄死后三年的故事,換句話說,這超出這部小說時(shí)間框架之外,如今成為七部分中的第六部分,名叫《中年男人》。這樣一來,小說結(jié)構(gòu)一下子完美了。后來,我意識(shí)到第六部分奇特地類似《玩笑》的第六部分,同樣是介紹框架外的角色,在小說的墻上打開了一扇密窗?!犊尚Φ膼邸纷畛跤惺畟€(gè)短篇故事,我在編排終稿時(shí)刪除了其中三個(gè),這本小說集就變得很連貫緊湊,為寫《笑忘錄》做了鋪墊。哈維爾醫(yī)生這個(gè)角色把第四部分和第六部分聯(lián)系在一起,《笑忘錄》的第四部分和第六部分也是由同一人物聯(lián)系,即達(dá)米娜(Tamina)。在寫《不能承受的生命之輕》時(shí),我決定打破數(shù)字七的魔咒,此后在好長(zhǎng)時(shí)間里都決定采用六部分的框架,但是總沒辦法把第一部分塑造成型。最終我明白它其實(shí)是由兩個(gè)部分構(gòu)成,像連體嬰,需要精巧的手術(shù)將其分割開。我說這些只想表明我沒有對(duì)神奇數(shù)字的迷信矯作上癮,也沒有執(zhí)著做出理性判斷。相反,我受到來自深處、無意識(shí)、不可思議的需求驅(qū)使,一種我無法回避的正式原型。我所有的小說都是圍繞數(shù)字七產(chǎn)生的結(jié)構(gòu)變體。
訪問人
你將小說清晰劃分為其部分,必定和你想把最多樣的元素融合進(jìn)一個(gè)整體的目的有關(guān)。你小說每一部分的形式都很特殊,向來自成一個(gè)世界。然而,小說采用數(shù)字已經(jīng)分成了幾個(gè)段落,那為什么這些分出來的段落也必須再分章節(jié)呢?
昆德拉
這些章節(jié)本身必須創(chuàng)造自己的世界,必須相對(duì)獨(dú)立。這就是我一直要求出版商確保這些數(shù)字醒目,章節(jié)劃分清晰的原因。章節(jié)好比樂譜的節(jié)拍段!有的節(jié)拍段(章節(jié))長(zhǎng),有的就短,也有的不規(guī)律。每一部分都該有音樂節(jié)拍器:中板,急板,行板等等?!渡钤趧e處》第六部分是行板,平靜而憂郁,講述一個(gè)中年男子和一個(gè)剛出獄的年輕女孩短暫邂逅。最后一部分是最急板,章節(jié)短小,從垂死的杰羅米爾跳到蘭波,萊蒙托夫和普希金。我首先以音樂的形式構(gòu)想《不能承受的生命之輕》。我知道最一部分必須十分輕緩,使用慢板,它集中在發(fā)生于一個(gè)地點(diǎn)的一段很短暫且平靜的時(shí)光,曲調(diào)安靜平緩。我也知道這一部分必須放在最急板之后,即《大行進(jìn)曲》之后。
訪問人
數(shù)字七規(guī)律有個(gè)例外,《為了告別的聚會(huì)》有五個(gè)部分。
昆德拉
《為了告別的聚會(huì)》是基于另一個(gè)正式原型:絕對(duì)單一,處理一個(gè)主題,使用一個(gè)拍子講述,喜劇性強(qiáng),風(fēng)格明顯,形式取材于滑稽戲。在《可笑的愛》中,《座談會(huì)》(The Symposium)的故事使用了同一種方式,即由五幕劇構(gòu)成的滑稽劇。
訪問人
你怎么理解滑稽???
昆德拉
我的意思是強(qiáng)調(diào)情節(jié),強(qiáng)調(diào)情節(jié)表層所有意料之外又可信的巧合。小說中沒有什么像情節(jié)和滑稽的夸張那樣來得可疑、荒謬、老氣、陳腐以及無趣00。從福樓拜起,小說家已經(jīng)嘗試摒棄情節(jié)詭計(jì),因而小說變得比最枯燥乏味的生活還枯燥乏味。然而,還有另一條路躲避情節(jié)上的可疑和俗套,那就是打破可能性的束縛。你可以在不可能的基礎(chǔ)上講述不可能的故事!卡夫卡就是這么構(gòu)想《美洲》(Amerika)的。在第一章中,卡爾遇見舅舅的方式是通過一系列最不可能發(fā)生的巧合??ǚ蚩ǚ滦н@種情節(jié),穿過滑稽劇的門,走進(jìn)了其第一個(gè)“超現(xiàn)實(shí)”宇宙,實(shí)現(xiàn)了第一個(gè)“夢(mèng)境與現(xiàn)實(shí)的交織”。
訪問人
但是你為什么給一部不純?yōu)閵蕵返男≌f選擇滑稽劇的形式?
昆德拉
但它就是娛樂!我理解不了法國(guó)人對(duì)娛樂的歧視,他們?yōu)槭裁慈绱诵哂谔峒啊皧蕵罚╠ivertissement)”?相比無聊乏味,他們更不愿冒娛樂的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。可他們也冒險(xiǎn)迷上媚俗,甜甜的東西00,擺弄裝飾,以及玫瑰色的燈光,即便是艾呂雅(Eluard)的詩歌或埃托雷·斯科拉(Ettore Scola)的新電影《舞廳》(Le Bal)也都沐浴在這種燈光中,其副標(biāo)題可以寫成:“法國(guó)人的媚俗史”。沒錯(cuò),不是娛樂,媚俗才是真正的審美疾病!偉大的歐洲小說最初都充當(dāng)消遣品,每一個(gè)真正的小說家對(duì)此很懷念。實(shí)際上,那些偉大消遣品的主題異常嚴(yán)肅,你想想塞萬提斯!在《為了告別的聚會(huì)》中,問題是人類值得活在地球上嗎?難道不該“讓地球擺脫人類的魔爪”嗎?我一生的雄心就是將最為嚴(yán)肅的問題和最為輕松的形式相結(jié)合。這不是純粹的藝術(shù)野心,輕佻的形式結(jié)合嚴(yán)肅的對(duì)象立馬就曝露出戲劇的真相(床上事和我們?cè)跉v史大舞臺(tái)的演出)和它們可怕的無意義。我們體驗(yàn)著不能承受的生命之輕。
訪問人
所以你也可以把新小說的名字用在《為了告別的聚會(huì)》上?
昆德拉
我的每部小說都可以用《不能承受的生命之輕》、《玩笑》或《可笑的愛》來命名,這些標(biāo)題之間可以互換,反映出那些為數(shù)不多的主題。它們吸引著我,定義著我,也不幸地限制著我。除了這些主題,我沒有其他東西可說或者可寫的。
訪問人
你的小說中有兩個(gè)正式的創(chuàng)作原型:(1)復(fù)調(diào),使多樣化的元素融入以數(shù)字七為基礎(chǔ)的構(gòu)架;(2)滑稽劇,單一同質(zhì),有戲劇性,繞開不可能發(fā)生的束縛。在這兩種原型外還有可能有一個(gè)昆德拉嗎?
昆德拉
我素來夢(mèng)想有某種偉大且無法預(yù)期的不忠,但我目前還沒有能力擺脫這兩種原型的重婚狀態(tài)。
原文地址:theparisreview.org
This interview is a product of several encounters with Milan Kundera in Paris in the fall of 1983. Our meetings took place in his attic apartment near Montparnasse. We worked in the small room that Kundera uses as his office. With its shelves full of books on philosophy and musicology, an old-fashioned typewriter and a table, it looks more like a student's room than like the study of a world-famous author. On one of the walls, two photographs hang side by side: one of his father, a pianist, the other of Leo? Janacek, a Czech composer whom he greatly admires.
We held several free and lengthy discussions in French; instead of a tape recorder, we used a typewriter, scissors, and glue. Gradually, amid discarded scraps of paper and after several revisions, this text emerged.
This interview was conducted soon after Kundera's most recent book, The Unbearable Lightness of Being, had become an immediate best-seller. Sudden fame makes him uncomfortable; Kundera would surely agree with Malcolm Lowry that "success is like a horrible disaster, worse than a fire in one's home. Fame consumes the home of the soul." Once, when I asked him about some of the comments on his novel that were appearing in the press, he replied, "I've had an overdose of myself!"
Kundera's wish not to talk about himself seems to be an instinctive reaction against the tendency of most critics to study the writer, and the writer's personality, politics, and private life, instead of the writer's works. "Disgust at having to talk about oneself is what distinguishes novelistic talent from lyric talent," Kundera told Le Nouvel Observateur.
Refusing to talk about oneself is therefore a way of placing literary works and forms squarely at the center of attention, and of focusing on the novel itself. That is the purpose of this discussion on the art of composition_._
INTERVIEWER
You have said that you feel closer to the Viennese novelists Robert Musil and Hermann Broch than to any other authors in modern literature. Broch thought--as you do--that the age of the psychological novel had come to an end. He believed, instead, in what he called the "polyhistorical" novel.
MILAN KUNDERA
Musil and Broch saddled the novel with enormous responsibilities. They saw it as the supreme intellectual synthesis, the last place where man could still question the world as a whole. They were convinced that the novel had tremendous synthetic power, that it could be poetry, fantasy, philosophy, aphorism, and essay all rolled into one. In his letters, Broch makes some profound observations on this issue. However, it seems to me that he obscures his own intentions by using the ill-chosen term "polyhistorical novel." It was in fact Broch's compatriot, Adalbert Stifter, a classic of Austrian prose, who created a truly polyhistorical novel in his Der Nachsommer _[Indian Summer], published in 1857. The novel is famous: Nietzsche considered it to be one of the four greatest works of German literature. Today, it is unreadable. It's packed with information about geology, botany, zoology, the crafts, painting, and architecture; but this gigantic, uplifting encyclopedia virtually leaves out man himself, and his situation. Precisely because it _is polyhistorical, Der Nachsommer totally lacks what makes the novel special. This is not the case with Broch. On the contrary! He strove to discover "that which the novel alone can discover." The specific object of what Broch liked to call "novelistic knowledge" is existence. In my view, the word "polyhistorical" must be defined as "that which brings together every device and every form of knowledge in order to shed light on existence." Yes, I do feel close to such an approach.
INTERVIEWER
A long essay you published in the magazine Le Nouvel Observateur caused the French to rediscover Broch. You speak highly of him, and yet you are also critical. At the end of the essay, you write: "All great works (just because they are great) are partly incomplete."
KUNDERA
Broch is an inspiration to us not only because of what he accomplished, but also because of all that he aimed at and could not attain. The very incompleteness of his work can help us understand the need for new art forms, including: (1) a radical stripping away of unessentials (in order to capture the complexity of existence in the modern world without a loss of architectonic clarity); (2) "novelistic counterpoint" (to unite philosophy, narrative, and dream into a single music); (3) the specifically novelistic essay (in other words, instead of claiming to convey some apodictic message, remaining hypothetical, playful, or ironic).
INTERVIEWER
These three points seem to capture your entire artistic program.
KUNDERA
In order to make the novel into a polyhistorical illumination of existence, you need to master the technique of ellipsis, the art of condensation. Otherwise, you fall into the trap of endless length. Musil's The Man Without Qualities is one of the two or three novels that I love most. But don't ask me to admire its gigantic unfinished expanse! Imagine a castle so huge that the eye cannot take it all in at a glance. Imagine a string quartet that lasts nine hours. There are anthropological limits--human proportions--that should not be breached, such as the limits of memory. When you have finished reading, you should still be able to remember the beginning. If not, the novel loses its shape, its "architectonic clarity" becomes murky.
INTERVIEWER
The Book of Laughter and Forgetting is made up of seven parts. If you had dealt with them in a less elliptical fashion, you could have written seven different full-length novels.
KUNDERA
But if I had written seven independent novels, I would have lost the most important thing: I wouldn't have been able to capture the "complexity of human existence in the modern world" in a single book. The art of ellipsis is absolutely essential. It requires that one always go directly to the heart of things. In this connection, I always think of a Czech composer I have passionately admired since childhood: Leo? Jana?ek. He is one of the greatest masters of modern music. His determination to strip music to its essentials was revolutionary. Of course, every musical composition involves a great deal of technique: exposition of the themes, their development, variations, polyphonic work (often very automatic), filling in the orchestration, the transitions, et cetera. Today one can compose music with a computer, but the computer always existed in composers' heads--if they had to, composers could write sonatas without a single original idea, just by "cybernetically" expanding on the rules of composition. Jana?ek's purpose was to destroy this computer! Brutal juxtaposition instead of transitions; repetition instead of variation--and always straight to the heart of things: only the note with something essential to say is entitled to exist. It is nearly the same with the novel; it too is encumbered by "technique," by rules that do the author's work for him: present a character, describe a milieu, bring the action into its historical setting, fill up the lifetime of the characters with useless episodes. Every change of scene requires new expositions, descriptions, explanations. My purpose is like Jana?ek's: to rid the novel of the automatism of novelistic technique, of novelistic word-spinning.
INTERVIEWER
The second art form you mentioned was "novelistic counterpoint."
KUNDERA
The idea of the novel as a great intellectual synthesis almost automatically raises the problem of "polyphony." This problem still has to be resolved. Take the third part of Broch's novel The Sleepwalkers; it is made up of five heterogeneous elements: (1) "novelistic" narrative based on the three main characters: Pasenow, Esch, Huguenau; (2) the personal story of Hanna Wendling; (3) factual description of life in a military hospital; (4) a narrative (partly in verse) of a Salvation Army girl; (5) a philosophical essay (written in scientific language) on the debasement of values. Each part is magnificent. Yet despite the fact that they are all dealt with simultaneously, in constant alternation (in other words, in a polyphonic manner), the five elements remain disunited--in other words, they do not constitute a true polyphony.
INTERVIEWER
By using the metaphor of polyphony and applying it to literature, do you not in fact make demands on the novel that it cannot possibly live up to?
KUNDERA
The novel can incorporate outside elements in two ways. In the course of his travels, Don Quixote meets various characters who tell him their tales. In this way, independent stories are inserted into the whole, fitted into the frame of the novel. This type of composition is often found in seventeenth- and eighteenth-century novels. Broch, however, instead of fitting the story of Hanna Wendling into the main story of Esch and Huguenau, lets both unfold simultaneously. Sartre (in The Reprieve), and Dos Passos before him, also used this technique of simultaneity. Their aim, however, was to bring together different novelistic stories, in other words, homogeneous rather than heterogeneous elements as in the case of Broch. Moreover, their use of this technique strikes me as too mechanical and devoid of poetry. I cannot think of better terms than "polyphony" or "counterpoint" to describe this form of composition and, furthermore, the musical analogy is a useful one. For instance, the first thing that bothers me about the third part of The Sleepwalkers is that the five elements are not all equal. Whereas the equality of all the voices in musical counterpoint is the basic ground rule, the sine qua non. In Broch's work, the first element (the novelistic narrative of Esch and Huguenau) takes up much more physical space than the other elements, and, even more important, it is privileged insofar as it is linked to the two preceding parts of the novel and therefore assumes the task of unifying it. It therefore attracts more attention and threatens to turn the other elements into mere accompaniment. The second thing that bothers me is that though a fugue by Bach cannot do without any one of its voices, the story of Hanna Wendling or the essay on the decline of values could very well stand alone as an independent work. Taken separately, they would lose nothing of their meaning or of their quality.
In my view, the basic requirements of novelistic counterpoint are: (1) the equality of the various elements; (2) the indivisibility of the whole. I remember that the day I finished "The Angels," part three of The Book of Laughter and Forgetting, I was terribly proud of myself. I was sure that I had discovered the key to a new way of putting together a narrative. The text was made up of the following elements: (1) an anecdote about two female students and their levitation; (2) an autobiographical narrative; (3) a critical essay on a feminist book; (4) a fable about an angel and the devil; (5) a dream-narrative of Paul Eluard flying over Prague. None of these elements could exist without the others, each one illuminates and explains the others as they all explore a single theme and ask a single question: "What is an angel?"
Part six, also entitled "The Angels," is made up of: (1) a dream-narrative of Tamina's death; (2) an autobiographical narrative of my father's death; (3) musicological reflections; (4) reflections on the epidemic of forgetting that is devastating Prague. What is the link between my father and the torturing of Tamina by children? It is "the meeting of a sewing machine and an umbrella" on the table of one theme, to borrow Lautreamont's famous image. Novelistic polyphony is poetry much more than technique. I can find no example of such polyphonic poetry elsewhere in literature, but I have been very astonished by Alain Resnais's latest films. His use of the art of counterpoint is admirable.
INTERVIEWER
Counterpoint is less apparent in The Unbearable Lightness of Being.
KUNDERA
That was my aim. There, I wanted dream, narrative, and reflection to flow together in an indivisible and totally natural stream. But the polyphonic character of the novel is very striking in part six: the story of Stalin's son, theological reflections, a political event in Asia, Franz's death in Bangkok, and Tomas's funeral in Bohemia are all linked by the same everlasting question: "What is kitsch?" This polyphonic passage is the pillar that supports the entire structure of the novel. It is the key to the secret of its architecture.
INTERVIEWER
By calling for "a specifically novelistic essay," you expressed several reservations about the essay on the debasement of values which appeared in The Sleepwalkers.
KUNDERA
It is a terrific essay!
INTERVIEWER
You have doubts about the way it is incorporated into the novel. Broch relinquishes none of his scientific language, he expresses his views in a straightforward way without hiding behind one of his characters--the way Mann or Musil would do. Isn't that Broch's real contribution, his new challenge?
KUNDERA
That is true, and he was well aware of his own courage. But there is also a risk: his essay can be read and understood as the ideological key to the novel, as its "Truth," and that could transform the rest of the novel into a mere illustration of a thought. Then the novel's equilibrium is upset; the truth of the essay becomes too heavy and the novel's subtle architecture is in danger of collapsing. A novel that had no intention of expounding a philosophical thesis (Broch loathed that type of novel!) may wind up being read in exactly that way. How does one incorporate an essay into the novel? It is important to have one basic fact in mind: the very essence of reflection changes the minute it is included in the body of a novel. Outside of the novel, one is in the realm of assertions: everyone's philosopher, politician, concierge--is sure of what he says. The novel, however, is a territory where one does not make assertions; it is a territory of play and of hypotheses. Reflection within the novel is hypothetical by its very essence.
INTERVIEWER
But why would a novelist want to deprive himself of the right to express his philosophy overtly and assertively in his novel?
KUNDERA
Because he has none! People often talk about Chekhov's philosophy, or Kafka's, or Musil's. But just try to find a coherent philosophy in their writings! Even when they express their ideas in their notebooks, the ideas amount to intellectual exercises, playing with paradoxes, or improvisations rather than to assertions of a philosophy. And philosophers who write novels are nothing but pseudonovelists who use the form of the novel in order to illustrate their ideas. Neither Voltaire nor Camus ever discovered "that which the novel alone can discover." I know of only one exception, and that is the Diderot of Jacques le fataliste. What a miracle! Having crossed over the boundary of the novel, the serious philosopher becomes a playful thinker. There is not one serious sentence in the novel--everything in it is play. That's why this novel is outrageously underrated in France. Indeed,Jacques le fataliste contains everything that France has lost and refuses to recover. In France, ideas are preferred to works. Jacques le fataliste cannot be translated into the language of ideas, and therefore it cannot be understood in the homeland of ideas.
INTERVIEWER
In The Joke, it is Jaroslav who develops a musicological theory. The hypothetical character of his thinking is thus apparent. But the musicological meditations in The Book of Laughter and Forgetting are the author's, your own. How am I then to understand whether they are hypothetical or assertive?
KUNDERA
It all depends on the tone. From the very first words, my intention is to give these reflections a playful, ironic, provocative, experimental, or questioning tone. All of part six of The Unbearable Lightness of Being ("The Grand March") is an essay on kitsch which expounds one main thesis: kitsch is the absolute denial of the existence of shit. This meditation on kitsch is of vital importance to me. It is based on a great deal of thought, experience, study, and even passion. Yet the tone is never serious; it is provocative. This essay is unthinkable outside of the novel, it is a purely novelistic meditation.
INTERVIEWER
The polyphony of your novels also includes another element, dream-narrative. It takes up the entire second part of Life Is Elsewhere, it is the basis of the sixth part of The Book of Laughter and Forgetting, and it runs through The Unbearable Lightness of Being by way of Tereza's dreams.
KUNDERA
These passages are also the easiest ones to misunderstand, because people want to find some symbolic message in them. There is nothing to decipher in Tereza's dreams. They are poems about death. Their meaning lies in their beauty, which hypnotizes Tereza. By the way, do you realize that people don't know how to read Kafka simply because they want to decipher him? Instead of letting themselves be carried away by his unequaled imagination, they look for allegories and come up with nothing but cliches: life is absurd (or it is not absurd), God is beyond reach (or within reach), et cetera. You can understand nothing about art, particularly modern art, if you do not understand that imagination is a value in itself. Novalis knew that when he praised dreams. They "protect us against life's monotony," he said, they "liberate us from seriousness by the delight of their games." He was the first to understand the role that dreams and a dreamlike imagination could play in the novel. He planned to write the second volume of his Heinrich von Ofterdingen as a narrative in which dream and reality would be so intertwined that one would no longer be able to tell them apart. Unfortunately, all that remains of that second volume are the notes in which Novalis described his aesthetic intention. One hundred years later, his ambition was fulfilled by Kafka. Kafka's novels are a fusion of dream and reality; that is, they are neither dream nor reality. More than anything, Kafka brought about an aesthetic revolution. An aesthetic miracle. Of course, no one can repeat what he did. But I share with him, and with Novalis, the desire to bring dreams, and the imagination of dreams, into the novel. My way of doing so is by polyphonic confrontation rather than by a fusion of dream and reality. Dream-narrative is one of the elements of counterpoint.
INTERVIEWER
There is nothing polyphonic about the last part of The Book of Laughter and Forgetting, and yet that is probably the most interesting part of the book. It is made up of fourteen chapters that recount erotic situations in the life of one man--Jan.
KUNDERA
Another musical term: this narrative is a "theme with variations." The theme is the border beyond which things lose their meaning. Our life unfolds in the immediate vicinity of that border, and we risk crossing it at any moment. The fourteen chapters are fourteen variations of the same situation's eroticism at the border between meaning and meaninglessness.
INTERVIEWER
You have described The Book of Laughter and Forgetting as a "novel in the form of variations." But is it still a novel?
KUNDERA
There is no unity of action, which is why it does not look like a novel. People can't_imagine_ a novel without that unity. Even the experiments of the nouveau roman were based on unity of action (or of nonaction). Sterne and Diderot had amused themselves by making the unity extremely fragile. The journey of Jacques and his master takes up the lesser part of Jacques le fataliste; it's nothing more than a comic pretext in which to fit anecdotes, stories, thoughts. Nevertheless, this pretext, this "frame," is necessary to make the novel feel like a novel. In The Book of Laughter and Forgetting there is no longer any such pretext. It's the unity of the themes and their variations that gives coherence to the whole. Is it a novel? Yes. A novel is a meditation on existence, seen through imaginary characters. The form is unlimited freedom. Throughout its history, the novel has never known how to take advantage of its endless possibilities. It missed its chance.
INTERVIEWER
But except for The Book of Laughter and Forgetting, your novels are also based on unity of action, although it is indeed of a much looser variety in The Unbearable Lightness of Being.
KUNDERA
Yes, but other more important sorts of unity complete them: the unity of the same metaphysical questions, of the same motifs and then variations (the motif of paternity in_The Farewell Party_, for instance). But I would like to stress above all that the novel is primarily built on a number of fundamental words, like Schoenberg's series of notes. In The Book of Laughter and Forgetting, the series is the following: forgetting, laughter, angels, "litost," the border. In the course of the novel these five key words are analyzed, studied, defined, redefined, and thus transformed into categories of existence. It is built on these few categories in the same way as a house is built on its beams. The beams of The Unbearable Lightness of Being are: weight, lightness, the soul, the body, the Grand March, shit, kitsch, compassion, vertigo, strength, and weakness. Because of their categorical character, these words cannot be replaced by synonyms. This always has to be explained over and over again to translators, who--in their concern for "good style"--seek to avoid repetition.
INTERVIEWER
Regarding the architectural clarity, I was struck by the fact that all of your novels, except for one, are divided into seven parts.
KUNDERA
When I had finished my first novel, The Joke, there was no reason to be surprised that it had seven parts. Then I wrote Life Is Elsewhere. The novel was almost finished and it had six parts. I didn't feel satisfied. Suddenly I had the idea of including a story that takes place three years after the hero's death--in other words, outside the time frame of the novel. This now became the sixth part of seven, entitled "The Middle-Aged Man." Immediately, the novel's architecture had become perfect. Later on, I realized that this sixth part was oddly analogous to the sixth part of The Joke ("Kostka"), which also introduces an outside character, and also opens a secret window in the novel's wall. Laughable Loves started out as ten short stories. Putting together the final version, I eliminated three of them. The collection had become very coherent, foreshadowing the composition of The Book of Laughter and Forgetting. One character, Doctor Havel, ties the fourth and sixth stories together. In The Book of Laughter and Forgetting, the fourth and sixth parts are also linked by the same person: Tamina. When I wrote The Unbearable Lightness of Being, I was determined to break the spell of the number of seven. I had long since decided on a six-part outline. But the first part always struck me as shapeless. Finally, I understood that it was really made up of two parts. Like Siamese twins, they had to be separated by delicate surgery. The only reason I mention all this is to show that I am not indulging in some superstitious affectation about magic numbers, nor making a rational calculation. Rather, I am driven by a deep, unconscious, incomprehensible need, a formal archetype from which I cannot escape. All of my novels are variants of an architecture based on the number seven.
INTERVIEWER
The use of seven neatly divided parts is certainly linked to your goal of synthesizing the most heterogeneous elements into a unified whole. Each part of your novel is always a world of its own, and is distinct from the others because of its special form. But if the novel is divided into numbered parts, why must the parts themselves also be divided into numbered chapters?
KUNDERA
The chapters themselves must also create a little world of their own; they must be relatively independent. That is why I keep pestering my publishers to make sure that the numbers are clearly visible and that the chapters are well separated. The chapters are like the measures of a musical score! There are parts where the measures (chapters) are long, others where they are short, still others where they are of irregular length. Each part could have a musical tempo indication: moderato, presto, andante, et cetera. Part six of Life Is Elsewhere is andante: in a calm, melancholy manner, it tells of the brief encounter between a middle-aged man and a young girl who has just been released from prison. The last part is prestissimo; it is written in very short chapters, and jumps from the dying Jaromil to Rimbaud, Lermontov, and Pushkin. I first thought of The Unbearable Lightness of Being in a musical way. I knew that the last part had to be pianissimo and lento: it focuses on a rather short, uneventful period, in a single location, and the tone is quiet. I also knew that this part had to be preceded by a prestissimo: that is the part entitled "The Grand March."
INTERVIEWER
There is an exception to the rule of the number seven. There are only five parts to The Farewell Party.
KUNDERA
The Farewell Party is based on another formal archetype: it is absolutely homogeneous, deals with one subject, is told in one tempo; it is very theatrical, stylized, and derives its form from the farce. In Laughable Loves, the story entitled "The Symposium" is built exactly the same way--a farce in five acts.
INTERVIEWER
What do you mean by farce?
KUNDERA
I mean the emphasis on plot and on all its trappings of unexpected and incredible coincidences. Nothing has become as suspect, ridiculous, old-fashioned, trite, and tasteless in a novel as plot and its farcical exaggerations. From Flaubert on, novelists have tried to do away with the artifices of plot. And so the novel has become duller than the dullest of lives. Yet there is another way to get around the suspect and worn-out aspect of the plot, and that is to free it from the requirement of likelihood. You tell an unlikely story that chooses to be unlikely! That's exactly how Kafka conceived Amerika. The way Karl meets his uncle in the first chapter is through a series of the most unlikely coincidences. Kafka entered into his first "sur-real" universe, into his first "fusion of dream and reality," with a parody of the plot--through the door of farce.
INTERVIEWER
But why did you choose the farce form for a novel that is not at all meant to be an entertainment?
KUNDERA
But it is an entertainment! I don't understand the contempt that the French have for entertainment, why they are so ashamed of the word "divertissement." They run less risk of being entertaining than of being boring. And they also run the risk of falling for kitsch, that sweetish, lying embellishment of things, the rose-colored light that bathes even such modernist works as Eluard's poetry or Ettore Scola's recent film Le Bal, whose subtitle could be: "French history as kitsch." Yes, kitsch, not entertainment, is the real aesthetic disease! The great European novel started out as entertainment, and every true novelist is nostalgic for it. In fact, the themes of those great entertainments are terribly serious--think of Cervantes! In The Farewell Party, the question is, does man deserve to live on this earth? Shouldn't one "free the planet from man's clutches"? My lifetime ambition has been to unite the utmost seriousness of question with the utmost lightness of form. Nor is this purely an artistic ambition. The combination of a frivolous form and a serious subject immediately unmasks the truth about our dramas (those that occur in our beds as well as those that we play out on the great stage of History) and their awful insignificance. We experience the unbearable lightness of being.
INTERVIEWER
So you could just as well have used the title of your latest novel for The Farewell Party?
KUNDERA
Every one of my novels could be entitled The Unbearable Lightness of Being or The Joke or Laughable Loves; the titles are interchangeable, they reflect the small number of themes that obsess me, define me, and, unfortunately, restrict me. Beyond these themes, I have nothing else to say or to write.
INTERVIEWER
There are, then, two formal archetypes of composition in your novels: (1) polyphony, which unites heterogeneous elements into an architecture based on the number seven; (2) farce, which is homogeneous, theatrical, and skirts the unlikely. Could there be a Kundera outside of these two archetypes?
KUNDERA
I always dream of some great unexpected infidelity. But I have not yet been able to escape my bigamous state.